Manchester United 2-1 Liverpool: a contest about the small details

March 21, 2010

No major tactical surprises here, and no surprise outcome either. Ferguson’s default line-up for these ‘big’ games is a flexible 4-5-1 shape (which means no Dimitar Berbatov) whilst Benitez was always going to go with Lucas ahead of Alberto Aquilani for a more solid midfield away at Old Trafford.

In that sense, the sides were both slightly more defensive than most fans would have hoped for, and this contributed to a relatively mediocre game, despite the excitement of two goals in the opening ten minutes.

United started with something approaching a 4-1-4-1 system, with Michael Carrick in the holding role and Darren Fletcher and Park Ji-Sung higher up the pitch – a brave move from Ferguson, in that it pitched Carrick solely up against Steven Gerrard. But this plan backfired – Carrick was caught out twice in the opening five minutes against Gerrard, and the second instance led to Liverpool’s opener. Ferguson changed this immediately after – moving Darren Fletcher deeper to assist Carrick, meaning United’s shape was closer to 4-2-3-1.

Perhaps the most notable aspect of the game was quite how defensively-minded the wide players were. Whereas players like Valencia, Nani, Kuyt and Maxi are often deployed to shut down the opposition full-backs (and this was partially the case here, of course), today much of their work involved tracking each other, and assisting their own full-backs. This led to a bit of a stalemate for most of the game in wide areas. It was interesting that the second-half deadlock was broken only when when Fletcher, a central midfielder, came to the right and the run of Gary Neville created an overload against Emiliano Insua, with Maxi having been drawn inside to track Valencia’s run.

But United found this game difficult. Their 4-5-1 shape, with Rooney up top alone, has proved wonderfully successful in big games away at Arsenal and home and away against Milan, resulting in 3-1, 3-2 and 4-0 victories, because with this system, United play primarily on the counter-attack. Arsenal are known for their tendency to leave their own defence exposed by throwing too many men forward, whilst Milan suffered because their three forwards showed no defensive awareness whatsoever. But against this Liverpool side that kept at least five (generally six) men behind the ball at all times, even in possession, United were unable to launch many counter-attacks – it’s difficult to think of a single instance when they managed to create an opportunity in this manner.

Their goals both came from the right-hand side – interesting, as this site has previously commented on their tendency to attack down that flank. Indeed, after the Arsenal game ZM commented on how often United looked to play long balls into that area, and today the first goal stemmed from this – a 50-yard ball finding Park on the right, who nodded it down to Valencia, who then won the penalty. The most interesting thing was the position of Daniel Agger, who got caught far too wide on the left (creating a huge space between the Liverpool centre-backsfor Valencia to run into) and then makes no attempt to get back into position to tackle. Why was Agger so far to the left? Was he concerned about Emiliano Insua being dominated in the air against Valencia and/or Park? Either way, it was such a soft goal for Liverpool to concede so soon after going ahead.

Liverpool changed things by introducing the three obvious players – Aquilani, Benayoun and Babel, but as so often with Benitez, he did things in a way which must be so frustrating for the players, constantly switching them into different positions. Aquilani came on ‘in the hole’, then was moved back into central midfield after barely ten minutes. Gerrard started off ‘in the hole’, then moved to the left, then was switched to the right. Benayoun came on for Lucas, but only after 81 minutes (20 minutes after Liverpool went behind), and was then deployed in a central role, with Gerrard stranded out on the right. Surely, with Liverpool desperately needing a goal, Gerrard should have been kept in the centre? He actually created two good chances when he pulled the ball back twice for Torres, but these chances were both created when he got himself into a reasonably central position where he was more easily able to link-up with the Spaniard.

Benitez always sets out his sides in a solid and organised fashion – but he’s never been the greatest at game-changing substitutions when Liverpool need a goal. He did not need both Mascherano and Lucas on the pitch for 80 minutes – you shouldn’t need two defensive midfielders to stem the creative threat of Park alone, and certainly not if your main aim is to find a goal yourself. His first substitution should probably have been to remove Lucas and either (a) put Aquilani in that role, or (b) introduce Benayoun alongside Gerrard and play something approaching a 4-1-4-1 to take the game to United. Lucas gets far too much criticism; he is a decent player – but he’s not the man to find you a goal.

An unremarkable game both in entertainment value and in tactical terms.

34 Responses to “ Manchester United 2-1 Liverpool: a contest about the small details ”

Jim on March 21, 2010 at 4:31 pm

Good article.

Iain Macintosh on March 21, 2010 at 5:15 pm

Annoying that Liverpool, who looked so adventurous on Monday, were quite happy to go back to bad habits here. As a Southend fan, I couldn’t care less who wins this game, but some entertainment might be nice. Sadly, when you’ve got Mascherano and Lucas in the same midfield, you know you’re not going to get much in the way of forward passing. Xabi Alonso really has been the critical Jenga block for them this season. Take him out and everything falls apart.

Great website by the way. Really nice to see someone taking a different approach to football blogging, something more constructive and thought-provoking than just raging against perceived injustices. We’ve got a chap on our paper (The New Paper in Singapore) who does a similar thing and it’s always a good read. I don’t know what it is about the UK Press. I was at the Chelsea – Inter post-match press conference earlier this week and, while all the Italian journalists were asking serious questions about Jose’s three-man attack and the pressure put on the full-backs etc etc, the English were fixated on abstract notions of revenge. It’s like they think that we, as a nation, can’t cope with anything more than spurious gossip and conjecture!

“but he’s never been the greatest at game-changing substitutions when Liverpool need a goal.”

Interesting, because most people still remember that one game in Istanbul. But I guess the subs then were more to provide no more conceding goals and stability over scoring the goal.
But it’s true, you really have to think back to probably that game for a game winning/changing sub.

Apart of the frustration you pointed out with regards to positions, how frustrating is it for say Aquilani, who although it was just Portsmouth, had a pretty decent game, to not start the game and have a rather cameo appearance in a position that isn’t his best? I personally think that Lucas gets too much stick for the wrong reasons, because it’s not his fault that he is more similar to Mascherano than Xabi Alonso but surely, as you point out, when you are 2-1 behind after 60 minutes, why play two rather “pure” holding midfielders with not so much attacking worth and leave your better players out of position?

Bob Spencer on March 22, 2010 at 4:11 pm

Just to reply to Mahdi, perhaps what you say is true, but one game that immediately springs to mind is the game against Fulham a few years ago. Alonso brought on at half time, 2-0 down, and we won 4-2. Also, against Everton, when Gerrard was taken off and Lucas replaced him. Not sure whether we were drawing that game, but still changed the game, because Lucas had the shot that Neville (P.) saved on the line, resulting in the penalty that Kuyt scored.
Thought of another, too: Olympiakos, 1-0 down in 2004/5 European game. ON came Sinama-Pongolle, scored within two minutes. And Neil Mellor, too, who also scored that game as a substitute and creating the third for Gerrard. There must be more examples, too.

Kevin White on March 23, 2010 at 10:22 pm

Yes those games came to the fore immediately, but I think that we’ve seen it less as time gone by. But a statement like ‘he’s never been the greatest at game-changing substitutions” is surely a fallacy.

I echo the comments made my Iain , who writes in my local paper. Great website ZM , games between these sides are always a matter of attrition. As for this game,sans the first 10 minutes, it was pretty dull. Great website ZM , keep up the good fight. It is sad some people state that football is a game of 22 men , 25 if u count the officials , chasing a ball.IMHO akin to a chess match, where a wrong move may cost u the game. P.S Iain, I am a Singaporean and i thoroughly enjoy the daily reads made by your good self. That said, I cant say the same for some other captain-obvious colleagues of yourself.

Mahdi: I ve heard too often of that magical night in Istanbul from peers who support liverpool. I am afraid if liverpool continue as they are, that would be the only thing benitez will be remembered for. By half-time you could tell by the look on the milan players that they already had one hand on the trophy. Having a 3 nil lead is double-edged sword. Complacency creeps it, whether you like it or not. Mourinho springs into mind when you talk about game winning subs. Now i can’t remember the exact game or players invovled but i am sure of it. Not to mention, his guts for making a change at half-time, even two sometimes.

Aquailani’s performance against portsmouth warranted a start in the next game, just too bad the next fiture was man utd. Knowing benitez and his tendency to not take risk, he would definitely be left out , as it did. Someone please point out to me when was the last time liverpool started with a front 2? I dont normally watch their games and for good reasons too.

But you can say that Gerrard’s movement off the right to get in between the lines (what Benitez wants) is what created the two chances at the end (although, yes, it may have been better off leaving him centrally).

Benitez certainly changed things at HT in Istanbul, but let’s be honest – he was simply rectifying his bizarre error in omitting Alonso in the first place.

Liverpool got a few late goals last season, but still essentially lost the league last season because of three poor 0-0 draws at home to Stoke, Fulham and West Ham – all matches where Benitez did nothing to change things apart from ’straight swaps’.

This season, I can’t think of a single game where he has changed things as a result of bringing on a substitute or by re-jigging the side. And Liverpool have had plenty of games where they’ve been in a position where he needed to…

Apologies, that was what I meant…Alonso was overrun in the first half.

MCGIE76 on March 21, 2010 at 7:57 pm

The change in Istanbul was more by default than by design – remember, Finnan went off at half time because of a thigh injury, and Kewell was replaced by Smicer in the 1st half because of injury also. The necessity of Hamman is what stemmed the Kaka tide. Without that injury, you can be certain that RB would have kept things as they were. His habit has been shown, over time, to swap like for like, at specific set times in the game. The change in Istanbul, while contributing to a legendary win, was a veering of RB’s normal course of action.

[...] little deeper to operate alongside Michael Carrick with Ji-Sung Park higher up the pitch. This was brilliantly pointed out by Zonal Marking (a website I all recommend you read daily) – which gave United a better shape, but left [...]

Good article mate as always love your intelligent take on analysis but I got to pull you up on the Benitez attacking subs quote…“but he’s never been the greatest at game-changing substitutions when Liverpool need a goal.”

If you look at the games last season that Liverpool came from behind to win late on, Benitez often “uncharacteristically” sacrificed full backs for attackers.

Against Boro Arbeloa was replaced with El Zhar with 7 mins to go in which time they scored twice finishing the game with Kuyt, Babel, Gerrard, Keane and Torres, thats 5 genuine forwards.

Against Wigan Arbeloa & Dossena were replaced by Benayoun & El Zhar with 11 minutes to go and they scored twice, playing with 2 in defence until Hyppia was introduced on 89 minutes.

Again versus Portsmouth Dossena was taken off for Alonso, 5-3-2 was changed to 442 with the 3 winning goals coming after the substitution.

In the win against Citeh Mashcerano was withdrawn for Keane, the 2 goals coming after his introduction.

Today there were few options on the bench to change the game, plus the addition of Johnson this season has negated the need to bring off a full back for an attacking option on the right and this may be why he doesn’t employ this system anymore.

BTW Alonso played the whole cl final, it was Hamman who came on at HT plus Benitez was always going to take a full back (Traore)off in the break then Finnans injury was discovered. Its all in Guillem Balague’s book “A season on the brink” well worth a read if you want some genuine insight into Benitez’s “ideas” that aren’t based on the fat Spanish waiter stereotype.

This is not a rant, just the facts jack, just the facts….

MCGIE76 on March 22, 2010 at 1:06 am

Last season, or more specifically, the second half of last season, was an anomaly in terms of Benitez’ philosophy. I’m certain the Liverpool fans were hoping it would stay that way this season, only for RB to revert to type. The issue for RB is his admiration for the Sacchi template, which is a joy to behold when you have Gullit and Van Basten, but can be stodgy and defensive when you have Lucas and Kuyt. For all the heralding of RB being a tactical master, it seems that Liverpool would be better served by some sort of change in their playing style and tactics – playing two out and our attacking wingers alongside Torres, for example, or a gradual switch to a 3-5-2 to take advantage of Johnson and Riera/Maxi. Rather than the Milan of Gullit, etc., perhaps RB should take his template from the Real Madrid of Carlos et al.

1. You said: “Last season, or more specifically, the second half of last season, was an anomaly in terms of Benitez’ philosophy.”

Three of the games I cited as examples all occurred before November 2008, I’d say that’s the start of the season, the Portsmouth game was in February. The media perceived a change to attacking football in the latter half of last season from the Real Madrid 4-0 result onwards (then United 4-1, Villa 5-0 etc) which was on March 10th. To me that suggests an attacking philosophy all season.

You claim this is an anomaly, but this seems to be purely based on the fact that it disproves your point. Simply put 60 games can’t be considered an anomaly, the anomaly would be the times when Liverpool were set up defensively last year.

2. It doesn’t make sense to compare the Milan side of the 80’s/90’s to the current Liverpool and to claim that an Italian side of that era was not in any way “defensive” is ludicrous. Also Van Basten was a striker and Gullit played predominantly in the hole behind so you should be comparing them to Torres & Gerrard not a central and right midfielder.

Even the most biased observer will admit Torres & Gerrard are of similar attacking quality to the Dutch legends you mentioned thus by your logic proving that Liverpool can effectively play this system. There was also a lot of “stodge” as you put it in the AC Milan squad, Salvatori, Stroppa, Simone, Fuser and Colombo to name a few were hardly legends of the game.

3. The suggestion that Liverpool should play the antiquated 3-5-2 in 2010 is random. Add to it the notion that Riera (who can’t get a game at left wing) or Maxi Rodriguez can play left wing back and it becomes laughable. If there was a successful Premier League side currently employing that formation it might be worth emulating but there isn’t.

4. You want Benitez to play like Milan or Madrid but they played in different leagues and different eras, if Liverpool should copy anyone logically it would be Man United who have been the most successful side in recent seasons. United play 4-5-1 with two holding midfielders in Carrick & Fletcher with Park, hardly a free flowing winger, more often than not deployed wide. Very similar to Liverpool’s current system wouldn’t you agree?

I deliberately posted stats to prove what I perceived as an inaccuracy in the article and your original post so I don’t see how you can discount my argument without producing evidence to the contrary.

MCGIE76 on March 22, 2010 at 10:56 pm

I don’t know if I should bother but….

1. You said: “Last season, or more specifically, the second half of last season, was an anomaly in terms of Benitez’ philosophy…

60 games in 6 years is an anomaly. In 6 seasons at Liverpool, Benitez has been an overly cautious coach. In his time at Valencia, he was a defensive coach. The Valencia team had skill on the ball, most certainly, but their strength under Benitez was the defensive set-up.

2. It doesn’t make sense to compare the Milan side of the 80’s/90’s to the current Liverpool…

I am not comparing the two sides randomly. I am comparing them because the Sacchi template is what Benitez models his teams on. The pressing game, the close distance between the lines, the reliance on teamwork rather than superstars, the universality of players. That’s not me talking, that is something very traceable to interviews with both Benitez and those close to Benitez over a period of many years. As for player to player comparisons, that’s what you brought in to the discussion. I wasn’t looking at position for position, but rather the quality of the players. The Sacchi side had an abundance of technically gifted and tactically astute players in its first 11. Kuyt wouldn’t have gotten on the bench for that team.

3. The suggestion that Liverpool should play the antiquated 3-5-2 in 2010 is random…

Not random at all. As a UEFA qualified coach I look at the game from the point of view of the possibilities of the players in a team and what could make them “tick” better than they currently do. That the current Liverpool side is stagnating in the 4-2-3-1 preferred by Benitez is fairly obvious – they lack ideas, they lack cohesion, and they lack attacking drive. Sometimes, throwing a tactical curveball at a group of players can focus them on their tasks better. And remember, the formation that won the 05 CL trophy for Liverpool was a modified 3-5-2 (or close to a 3-4-3) brought about by the forced changes at half time.

4. You want Benitez to play like Milan or Madrid but they played in different leagues and different eras, if Liverpool should copy anyone logically it would be Man United who have been the most successful side in recent seasons. United play 4-5-1 with two holding midfielders in Carrick & Fletcher with Park, hardly a free flowing winger, more often than not deployed wide. Very similar to Liverpool’s current system wouldn’t you agree?

I don’t want Benitez to play like Milan – Benitez does. Also the reference to the 90’s Real Madrid was merely an example to give a clearer picture of the idea I was referring to. The United template, while working well for United, clearly isn’t bringing any trophies to Everton anytime soon, and they play a similar formation. Incidentally, the 4-2-3-1 you refer to at United is actually a 4-4-1-1 slightly modified – Ferguson has stayed largely true to that formation since his days at Aberdeen. However, any discussion about formations is near pointless without taking into account the roles and tasks of the players, and the movements they are require to make in defense, and the movements they are allowed to make in attack.

I deliberately posted stats to prove what I perceived as an inaccuracy in the article and your original post so I don’t see how you can discount my argument without producing evidence to the contrary

I posted stats and your still spitting back unsubstantiated claims about Benitez being too defensive. Give up mate.

It wasn’t a subliminal when I didn’t @ you to correct the nonesense you wrote about Benitez not changing the formation in Istanbul. I didn’t want to get dragged into a debate, just correct the inaccuracies people were posting. You obviously felt humiliated, got the hump and won’t let it go.

“As a UEFA qualified coach” #EPIC FAIL

Don’t even try and say you were mentioning your UEFA badge incidentally or to prove a point cos I’ve seen you start every tweet with that too, please get over yourself.

My advice to you “As a UEFA qualified coach” is to show some respect to fellow posters and back your arguments with stats, facts and quotes rather than spouting about having a blue peter badge.

Now please LMNO of your waffle and reply to someone else, I’ve proven my point end of.

You were recommended by someone on the GU blog, and you are now bookmarked. Nice to see a good non-tribal analysis. The other boys have to sell traffic stats.

I am a long time (it hurts to think how long) MU fan. I have no problem with LFC as a club or with its players. The fans are still in never never land, but that’s why we are all fans, right?

But Benitez seems to wear away the talent of his players. Treatment of Yossi has, at times, been deplorable. Lucas was best young player in Brazil according to reports? He is now Darren Fletcher light from two years ago. And now problems with Riera, who I thought would resolve the problems down the left. Insua seems to be going backwards, and exactly how much has been spent on fullbacks?

PS – What price Sneijder now?

Gee on March 22, 2010 at 6:26 am

Riera complained that rafa was distant with his players, hardly spoke to them and did not allow them to play freely.

Could that be why no youngsters are comming thru and why creative payers like babel,lucas,insua, benayoon are not doing so well?

not sniping just a genuine questions to LFC fans

Bob Spencer on March 22, 2010 at 4:18 pm

So many of these same players were doing extremely well last year, though – under the same manager.

I think Rushie said it recently that confidence is of so much importance. If a player loses his touch for a few weeks, months, it’s awful, and you just have to keep plugging away until it returns; when a whole team or squad has a lack of confidence, how difficult will that then be?

In football we’re too eager to write off the losing manager’s tactics. Tactics matter but all said much less than the quality and performances of the personnel, as well as things like luck, referees, form, momentum, and swagger.

[...] to go with Lucas ahead of Alberto Aquilani for a more solid midfield away at Old Trafford.” (Zonal Marking), (Zonal Marking – “Defending Steven Gerrard’s Old Trafford [...]

Thor Magnus on March 24, 2010 at 9:39 am

Thanks for a brilliant web site (only discovered it this week thanks to a Guardian link).
I just have a few comments to make regarding United’s performance against Liverpool.

I think it’s interesting to compare the defensive errors made by United for Torres’ goal, and those that Blackburn committed when Drogba scored. Both goals conceded early, both goals despite having four defenders in the box and the striker unmarked. Like Blackburn, United made 3 errors. Liverpool’s hopes, as in the previous encounters, lay in winning the ball high up the pitch and attack at great speed. Carrick lost possession due to a sloppy pass (he would continue throughout the game, uncaracteristically, to misplace easy passes). Neville saw what was coming so sprinted back to cover, but failed to intuit Torres’ sudden move in the box. Several others were also looking on. However, the gravest error was that two men, Vidic and Evra, were ballwatching and did not pick up Kuyt. That is the real reason for the goal. They both ran towards Gerrard as he evaded Ferdinand, leaving Kuyt entirely on his own. In fact, it’s surprising that more teams do not exploit this channel more systematically against United.

As for Valencia, he’s been quite brilliant for United. However, he has two weaknesses. One is anticipation and awareness of the players around him. He seems to have a problem knowing what Berbatov’s intentions are (don’t we all), and is not always tuned into the right back’s advances. But that is probably just due to it being his first season.

His big weakness is he is the most one-footed player ever. He will do anything to avoid using his left, always shifting the ball onto his other foot. As a pro he should at least be able to develop his left foot to an acceptable level. Even Giggs will use his right foot when necessary (witness his goal away at West Ham last season). If Valencia had worked on his left foot more, then it would be possible to swap positions with Nani during games. As mentioned in the article, Nani is better on the right. And would it not be interesting to see Valencia on the left, cutting in?

Anonymous on March 25, 2010 at 1:03 am

Ivo:

“It’s not that you are not welcome, it is the manner with which you present your opinion. If you need a UEFA badge to support it, then I doubt you will get much respect but rather be seen as pretentious and arrogant.”

If you read the thread carefully, I posted an initial opinion, to which Pitchslap replied. His first sentence stated “I don’t know if I should bother, but…”, itself an arrogant stance as it implies that only he has the answers. He then went on to present some “statistics” that purportedly proved his argument over mine. At the end of his post, he then stated that “I [Pitchslap] deliberately posted stats to prove what I perceived as an inaccuracy in the article and your original post so I don’t see how you can discount my argument without producing evidence to the contrary.”

So in rebutting his “appeal to authority” (the authority of his stats) I presented my background, not to be arrogant, but to show that he wasn’t the only poster who could lay claim to scientific evidence in order to support their argument. As it happens, Benitez is one of the coaches I have studied intently. I’m also a Liverpool fan. I liked elements of Pitchslap’s post (and other posts he’s made, too). But if it is perfectly fair for one person to claim authority because of statistical research, then surely it is also fair for another person to claim authority because of qualification, no?

If that is perceived as arrogant, then that is a problem with the perceiver. I’m a generally humble person, especially when it comes to coaching. I haven’t yet reached the heights of a Mourinho to be able to call myself a Special One. But I WILL defend my opinions in the face of criticism that doesn’t seem to want to allow for discourse.

Also, Juve need BIG changes for next season if they are to challenge for the Scudetto again. Roma are doing well. Maybe getting rid of Ranieri was a bit hasty?

MCGIE76 on March 25, 2010 at 1:03 am

Ivo:

“It’s not that you are not welcome, it is the manner with which you present your opinion. If you need a UEFA badge to support it, then I doubt you will get much respect but rather be seen as pretentious and arrogant.”

If you read the thread carefully, I posted an initial opinion, to which Pitchslap replied. His first sentence stated “I don’t know if I should bother, but…”, itself an arrogant stance as it implies that only he has the answers. He then went on to present some “statistics” that purportedly proved his argument over mine. At the end of his post, he then stated that “I [Pitchslap] deliberately posted stats to prove what I perceived as an inaccuracy in the article and your original post so I don’t see how you can discount my argument without producing evidence to the contrary.”

So in rebutting his “appeal to authority” (the authority of his stats) I presented my background, not to be arrogant, but to show that he wasn’t the only poster who could lay claim to scientific evidence in order to support their argument. As it happens, Benitez is one of the coaches I have studied intently. I’m also a Liverpool fan. I liked elements of Pitchslap’s post (and other posts he’s made, too). But if it is perfectly fair for one person to claim authority because of statistical research, then surely it is also fair for another person to claim authority because of qualification, no?

If that is perceived as arrogant, then that is a problem with the perceiver. I’m a generally humble person, especially when it comes to coaching. I haven’t yet reached the heights of a Mourinho to be able to call myself a Special One. But I WILL defend my opinions in the face of criticism that doesn’t seem to want to allow for discourse.

Also, Juve need BIG changes for next season if they are to challenge for the Scudetto again. Roma are doing well. Maybe getting rid of Ranieri was a bit hasty?

I asked you nicely to leave my name out of your posts, I even said please but you won’t leave me alone.

All I posted was a response to 1 sentence I thought didn’t hold weight in Zonal Markings original article and 1 incorrect claim by you that Benitez would not have changed anything at half time but for Finnans injury.

If you still think you’re right you are deluded. Its also plainly embarrassing that you don’t know the story of half time in Istanbul as a Liverpool fan. Benitez’s speech, Traore getting in the shower and 12 men on the chalkboard are all part of LFC folklore now.

Zonal Marking has politely responded to my criticism on Twitter:

Zonal_Marking @pitchslap Ha not at all, was an interesting read. Your points about RB’s subs last term are entirely fair.

Case closed so STOP TALKING ABOUT ME, CALLING ME ARROGANT AND STOP WAFFLING ABOUT YOUR UEFA COACHING BADGE AND EXPERIENCE WHEN YOU COACH A LOCAL SCHOOL TEAM IN CONNECTICUT FFS.

I actually enjoyed this confrontation as much as I enjoyed the article that caused it.

My humble opinion, and I am probably going to regret sharing it, is that neither of you allows for RB to be flexible in his coaching. Yes, every coach has systems in his head that he stands by most of the time and he thinks work, but RB has actually been pretty flexible over the last 5 years – probably due to the fact that he has had to accommodate a lot of different players until they got used to his style. Plus, you have players like Gerrard, Benayoun, Kuyt – why the heck shouldn’t you be flexible? Gerrard can play any position on the pitch pretty much, and the other two are extremely versatile and very hard workers. I think any coach would have had fun coaching a side like Liverpool these past couple years. Not a great deal of galacticos, but most players have been awfully solid.

Not taking sides at all, but they really do miss Xabi and yes, using your UEFA badge on here is pretty pathetic. Just saying

MCGIE76 on March 24, 2010 at 4:43 am

Pitchslap,

No idea where you think I got the hump. I actually liked your post and the thoughts you expressed. However, you were the one who resorted to appeals to authority by claiming that your facts and stats trumped all arguments. I merely competed with your stats and facts with qualifications. Not a blue peter badge (good line, lol), but a qualification required to coach at the top levels. It doesn’t make me any more correct than you, but it does signify that I (or anyone in a similar position) can make equally sound arguments that are not necessarily based on “stats” as you called them. Even though I am not averse to using stats and match analysis with my teams, they can also be exploited to make points. For example, if a surgeon said you had a serious illness and that there’s a lifesaving operation that could prolong your life, but it only has a 10% success rate; do you follow the stat and say “well I’ve a 90% chance of dying so I won’t have the operation” or do you listen to the experienced surgeon who says “well I’ve performed this operation twice and both people survived” and take the operation? The point I’m making is that we all have our “knowledge backgrounds”. You used “stats” to support your arguments, and would only hear of a counter argument that also used stats. That is a straw man argument, for it denies the validity of knowledge and experience. Much the same as if I said “you can only reply to me if you have coached Champion’s League level players”. That would also be a nonsense, on my part. We make our points, and if the other party agrees, great. If not, there’s not a lot we can do about it, except perhaps see if there is anything they said that might alter our own view. Such is the nature of life and debate

Ivo,

RB was actually pretty flexible in his first two years at Pool. He frequently changed formations from game to game. Then after 2006 it all changed, and he became entrenched in his 4-2-3-1, especially when Torres went to the club. It’s almost the same as Houllier with Owen – sometimes, the way the forward plays dictates the tactics for the entire team. It may not be all RB’s doing to play defensively and hit Torres with the long ball, but it certainly is something observable over 3 years or so. Alonso was the key last season to breaking out of that to give some alteration to the tactics. Also, if a qualified coach is not welcome on a website that talks tactics, then that is pretty pathetic in itself, don’t you think? lol. Football is one of a tiny few industries where knowledge is feared.

Ivo on March 24, 2010 at 7:57 pm

It’s not that you are not welcome, it is the manner with which you present your opinion. If you need a UEFA badge to support it, then I doubt you will get much respect but rather be seen as pretentious and arrogant.

As I said, both of you make some fine points, and as a Juventus fan I have been forced to really take a close look at Benitez’s spell at pool to see if he would fit la vecchia signora if he ever makes it over. As of now, I am leaning towards NO, he won’t. We shall see what happens